NIW 昨天收到RFE,很沮丧,把NIW的要求都重复了一遍,要求提供以下材料, 1.Evidence of the full extent to which your work has, in some way, changed the work of others throughout the field 2.Evidence your work was discussed in the field, such as articles in magazines or newspapers, interviews or any media reports; 3.Documentation to show that you have made achievements in the field, such as performance evaluations, evidence of copyrights or patents held by you; 4.Evidence to show that you possess special skills, knowledge, or abilities that could not be articulated on an application for a labor certification; 5.Letters from current or former employer(s) or clients(s) with personal knowledge of the significance of your present and past contributions. Details should include the specific tasks or accomplishments as compared to others who are employed in similar pursuits within the field of endeavor. The letters should include the date and the name, address, and title of the writer; 6.Evidence to establish that you are not seeking a national interest waiver based on a shortage of qualified workers in a given field, regardless of the nature of the occupation. The national interest waiver is not warranted solely for the purpose of ameliorating a local labor shortage. 第一,第三条,我已经交了,不知怎么还要,难道是因为背景太弱的原因?第二条,我 没有,不知怎么回答。第四,第六条,我看不明白什么意思,不知原因在哪?第五条, 推荐信的格式还有问题,咳。 背景很弱,近期只有一个摘要投出,急死了,该如何准备? 求前辈们帮忙看看,给予指点! 万分感谢!!!
谢谢大家的建议!非常感激! 我跟我的律师联系,他回复说too bad we got this RFE, but thanks for sending it to me (I didn't get it yet in the mail). I have read it over, and I see that this officer has created a different legal standard for NIW than the actual one, in his requests for additional evidence. I will be writing a reply that explains why his requests differ from the actual legal standard. On the other hand, we will want to prepare some more documentation if we can , to overcome his objections. One thing we can do is to get one or more new recommendation letters, especially from someone who may have used your research in their research. 周二给他打电话,我也不知道他说的“a different legal standard for NIW than the actual one” 是什么。 我的背景确实非常的弱,正因为如此,才找了这个律师,因为网上说他可以帮写推荐信 ,而且写得非常好,人也很精明。也是自己的case太弱,推荐信和PL都不是很给力,尤 其是PL写的很糟(说实话,后悔找了他)完全不是网上推荐的格式,跟他们讲,说他们 就用这种格式,我也不知道该如何去改。他全程都让手下的人做的。 前辈们的意思,是不是我得重新写推荐信,重新组织材料了,再递一边? 我近期没有新的东西,引用又极少。再要推荐信都很难了。咳!
你的petition letter估计写得有些问题,你的是围绕以下3点提供”论据“论证的吗? 1. Work in an area of “substantial intrinsic merit” means work in a field that is valuable to the national interest of the U.S. Research in any scientific field 2.The applicant’s work, if successful, benefits the U.S. nationally in scope, means that an applicant’s work cannot have merely a limited regional impact 3.National Interest would be adversely affected if a Labor Certification were required for the alien. 即使是NIW,本质上你还是要证明自己足够优秀(EXCEPTIONAL INSTEAD OF OUTSTANDING AS DESCRIBED IN EB-1 CATEGORY)
abilities
【在 m*n 的大作中提到】 : NIW 昨天收到RFE,很沮丧,把NIW的要求都重复了一遍,要求提供以下材料, : 1.Evidence of the full extent to which your work has, in some way, changed : the work of others throughout the field : 2.Evidence your work was discussed in the field, such as articles in : magazines or newspapers, interviews or any media reports; : 3.Documentation to show that you have made achievements in the field, such : as performance evaluations, evidence of copyrights or patents held by you; : 4.Evidence to show that you possess special skills, knowledge, or abilities : that could not be articulated on an application for a labor certification; : 5.Letters from current or former employer(s) or clients(s) with personal
h*8
30 楼
太没经验,明显的诱供嘛。 现在只能介样,注意记笔记哈。 提李嘉欣是要加薪~~,为了lp~~ Anne Hatherway那大嘴,吃pizza都不用切撒,还是喜欢国女撒~~ 圆过去了就给俺几个包子哈
根据你律师的英文写作判断,是个华人律师。 以我个人看,你律师的策略是挑战IO:你的判案标准是你自己发明创造的,是有别于实 际的法律标准的。这个策略是好是坏不好评价。但肯定是冒险。 以我的理解,“The letters should include the date and the name, address, and title of the writer”说明IO都不知道谁写的推荐信,所以,这些推荐信可能就没有 起到推荐信的作用。如果真是这样,你的律师太不负责了!我觉得你或许可以补充每个 推荐人的简单CV,同时,按IO要求,加上那些该“include”的。从另一个角度看,说 明你的案子只是推荐信没有被采纳的问题,一旦加上那些该“include”的,推荐信被 采纳,或许一系列的RFE内容都有可能迎刃而解。 不知道全貌,从你的只言片语粗看,真不如fire了律师,自己DIY。(不负责地乱说)
it . can new
【在 m*n 的大作中提到】 : 谢谢大家的建议!非常感激! : 我跟我的律师联系,他回复说too bad we got this RFE, but thanks for sending it : to me (I didn't get it yet in the mail). I have read it over, and I see : that this officer has created a different legal standard for NIW than the : actual one, in his requests for additional evidence. I will be writing a : reply that explains why his requests differ from the actual legal standard. : On the other hand, we will want to prepare some more documentation if we can : , to overcome his objections. One thing we can do is to get one or more new : recommendation letters, especially from someone who may have used your : research in their research.
m*n
43 楼
谢谢大家热心的帮助, 真的非常感激!大家的建议我会认真的考虑和准备! 再次感谢!!!
and
【在 A**********n 的大作中提到】 : 根据你律师的英文写作判断,是个华人律师。 : 以我个人看,你律师的策略是挑战IO:你的判案标准是你自己发明创造的,是有别于实 : 际的法律标准的。这个策略是好是坏不好评价。但肯定是冒险。 : 以我的理解,“The letters should include the date and the name, address, and : title of the writer”说明IO都不知道谁写的推荐信,所以,这些推荐信可能就没有 : 起到推荐信的作用。如果真是这样,你的律师太不负责了!我觉得你或许可以补充每个 : 推荐人的简单CV,同时,按IO要求,加上那些该“include”的。从另一个角度看,说 : 明你的案子只是推荐信没有被采纳的问题,一旦加上那些该“include”的,推荐信被 : 采纳,或许一系列的RFE内容都有可能迎刃而解。 : 不知道全貌,从你的只言片语粗看,真不如fire了律师,自己DIY。(不负责地乱说)